Election season has arrived. This might not sound as exciting as Christmas season or football season or Vivaldi’s “Four Seasons,” but for many of us it’s kind of a big deal.
There are, for example, the candidates, those brave souls who dare to run for office. And there are, for another example, the members of The Columbian’s Editorial Board, those intrepid souls who take it upon themselves to interview the candidates who have dared to run for office.
And with the arrival of election season, the word of the day — every day — becomes “endorsements.” You see, endorsements are the currency of the political world. Well, I guess votes are the currency, so we’ll say that endorsements are the stocks and bonds. And one of the interesting things about endorsements is that they can mean two very different things.
Newspapers long have made a habit of “endorsing” one person or another for a political office. Traditionally, this means they consider the candidates and interview them and then tell readers who is the superior candidate. Whether that has any impact on the minds of voters is open to debate, but it remains an important function of the media.
This is particularly true for local races. If there is a contest for President of the United States, voters have no shortage of information about the candidates. But if, say, Doug Lasher and Lauren Colas are running for Clark County treasurer, the odds are that most local residents are not familiar with the candidates or the issues. The odds are that most residents won’t take the time to attend candidate forums or do a lot of reading about Lasher and Colas.
That’s where we come in. The Columbian’s Editorial Board will sit down with the candidates, ask what we hope are relevant questions, and then share our thoughts with readers. But while most newspapers will write an “endorsement” for a political race, we are careful to call them “recommendations.”
That might appear to be a matter of semantics, but our thinking is that readers are smart enough to consider the issues for themselves; our editorials are simply designed to raise some discussion. Perhaps more important, we also post video of our meetings online; you can find them at http://www.columbian.com/videos.
Ah, but that is not the only area in which “endorsements” come into play during election season. Because one thing we typically ask of candidates is what kind of endorsements they have received from throughout the area.
In this regard, endorsements can be kind of tricky. Days before the 2004 presidential election, John Kerry was endorsed by Osama bin Laden, which probably didn’t help Kerry’s prospects. And during the 2012 election, President Obama was endorsed by then-Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez, which probably was only slightly more welcome than Kerry’s endorsement from bin Laden.
Support can be varied
Locally, we run across some candidates who have endorsements from both Republicans and Democrats; from both prominent individuals and prominent unions; from both political organizations and elected officials. And then there was the candidate who, prior to the primary election, essentially said, “Endorsements? Are you kidding? I’m a political novice; nobody knows me.”
Which is kind of the point. While voters might romanticize the notion of a political newcomer who can generate a true grass-roots campaign, the fact is that endorsements demonstrate the ability to formulate a cogent message and get people to buy into it. Receiving an endorsement from, say, the Society of Satan Worshipers might not help a candidate, but earning one from a respected local group can go a long way.
Of course, having a long list of endorsements is not enough to sway The Columbian’s Editorial Board. It simply is one factor that might or might not play a role in our decision about which candidate to recommend.
But when you hear talk of endorsements, there is one conclusion to be had: ‘Tis the season.
Morning Briefing Newsletter
Get a rundown of the latest local and regional news every Mon-Fri morning.
